Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit 1 PIAT
Putting It All Together: The Riverwood Fish Kill—Finding the Solution
The goal for this project is to determine the cause of the Riverwood
fish kill. It is a group project. Groups will consist of two to three persons,
and will be assigned by your teacher. They will be organized around the
possible causes of the fish kill. The purpose of this activity is to determine
the following key issues:
1. Who is responsible for the fish kill?
2. What should be done to remedy the situation?
3. Who should have to pay for the costs associated with the fish kill?
4. Can this situation be avoided in the future?
Four class days will be utilized for this project. All will be in the library.
You will then have one additional week to finish the project. Because this
project will require outside class time, it is recommended that you decide
early in the process which partner is responsible for each section described
below. Any partner that does not complete his/her section will not receive
credit for the other partner's work. The requirements for this project are
listed below. The rubrics that will be used to grade this project are
attached. Also attached are frames to guide your analysis of the graphs,
and a historical perspective of the data involved as well as a brief
description of each of the concerned groups. The project is worth
approximately 100 points.
81904316
-1-
REQUIREMENTS
There are four main pieces to the final project:
(1) Graphs
Each group will construct four graphs using the Excel program.
The graphs are group specific, and for the most part, not repeated
among the groups. Each group has two particular factors it must
graph. Both factors will be graphed over a seven day cycle and a twoyear cycle for a total of four graphs. Your teacher will tell you which
two factors your group is graphing.
(2) Graph Examination Worksheet
This is a set of questions regarding each factor that you
examined. It will look at the factors over a seven day period and a
two year period. Research will be necessary to support your
understanding of the data and its affect on the Snake River Fish Kill.
(3) Oral Presentation Worksheet
In order to prepare for the presentations, each group will
complete the oral presentation worksheet in the packet. In essence, it
requires the student to consider plan a presentation based upon the
graph examination worksheet. Further research may be helpful to
prepare this worksheet.
(4) Oral Presentation
This is where you will present your material to the class in
order for us to determine the cause (and method of remediation) of
the fish kill. Remember, you are probably the only group presenting
information about that factor, so the class is depending on you to be
thorough and accurate!
81904316
-2-
DESCRIPTION OF PROBLEM
An Introduction to the Snake River Community
The History of the Data
Since the early 1900s various groups have measured the Snake River
watershed in a number of different ways. As a result, although some of the
measurements and methods have changed, there is an excellent record of
data for the past few years.
Joseph Fisker of the County Sanitation Commission has measured the
river's pH, dissolved oxygen, and water temperature. For the past few
years he has also measured water entering the utility water system daily.
Using a portable meter Fisker measures the pH--the acidity or basicity of
the water. Using a special probe and working under the bridge near
Riverwood Hospital, he samples dissolved oxygen at a depth of one-half
meter. Twice a month he verifies the readings with a chemical test.
Knowing the water temperature allows Fisker to calculate the saturation of
oxygen in the water.
Every day the power company monitors water flow on the Snake River.
The data is reported monthly in cubic feet per second. In the same fashion,
the company also measures and reports the amount of rainfall in inches. The
data is collaborated with measurements taken by the National Stream
Water-Quality Monitoring Networks, part of the U.S. Geological Survey.
The Aurgent Mining Company, which once operated several zinc and
silver mines in the area, still measures several metal ions in the river. Greta
Black, Aurgent's supervisor of environmental programs, has provided data
for the past two years. She also took daily measurements for the week
following the discovery of the fish kill.
Finally, each week an environmental consulting firm, under contract to
the Snake River Agricultural Cooperative measure the organic carbon,
nitrates, phosphates, pesticides, and other dissolved molecular substances in
the river. Don Walker, vice-president of the cooperative, has provided data
on these measurements for the past two years. The amount of organic
carbon indicates organic matter that has a biological origin, such as dead
plant matter or animal wastes. Nitrates and phosphates generally get into
the water from fertilizers, animal wastes, or treated wastewater from
cities. Measuring pesticides and other dissolved molecular substances is
more difficult; detecting these substances involves specialized tests.
This data is based on an actual fish kill. The data should point clearly
to the cause.
81904316
-3-
THE CONNECTING IDEAS
One more thing… while there are multiple factors that will be graphed and
analyzed, when it comes to the final solution, there are four basic possible
causes of the fish kill. Each will be indicated by the combination of several
of the factors that are graphed.
1. Low Oxygen Level
 Heavy rainfall or large release from dam
 High water temperatures
 Low dissolved oxygen levels
 High nitrate and phosphate levels
 High organic carbon
2. Molecular Substances
 Heavy rainfall
 Detectable levels of pesticide in water or fish
 Evidence of pesticide spill
3. Gas bubble trauma
 Large release from dam
 High, supersaturated dissolved oxygen levels
 Lower water temperatures
4. Heavy metal poisoning
 Heavy rainfall or large release from dam
 High levels of mercury or heavy metals in water
 Water having a low pH
81904316
-4-
DESCRIPTION OF GROUPS INVOLVED
(Who could possibly be to blame?)
Power Company Officials (PCBs, Organic Carbon)
The power plant includes a dam and reservoir that ensure an adequate
supply of cooling water. The dam, constructed in the 1930s, had the most
current design of that time. Since then, its basic structure has not been
modified. The company monitors water flow and rain fall regularly. Your
company's engineers control the rate of water release from the dam into
the Snake River. A meteorologist on staff helps with weather predictions.
Normally, only relatively small volumes of water are released at any
particular time. However, releasing large quantities of water from the dam
is a standard way of preventing flooding. The last time such a large volume
of water was released from the dam was 30 years ago. A fish kill was
reported then, but the cause remained unknown.
On that occasion,
Riverwood and surrounding area had experienced an unusually wet summer.
The top company officials did approve the water release form the
dam, a standard practice given the time of year and the weather forecast.
Agricultural Cooperative Representatives
Pesticides could be responsible for the Snake River fish kill.
Cooperative members in the Snake River include farmers and ranchers
managing a variety of crops and livestock. Your cooperative assumes a
proactive role in informing its members of current best practices and
regulations regarding the use of agrochemicals and the management of
wastes and runoff from fields and pastures.
All members of your
cooperative are licensed to use agrochemicals and trained in the appropriate
means of applying them. There has not been a fish kill in recent years, even
though over that period of time the Coop members have used the same
pesticides and other chemicals. Many of the agricultural leaders are
environmentalists by nature. They know that the best way to ensure
prospering farmland is to care for all land properly.
Heavy rains present a problem for farmers. Although the rain is good
for crops, it can wash away recently applied fertilizers and pesticides. This
is not only expensive, but it can cause problems if these substances wash
into the watershed.
81904316
-5-
Mining Company Representatives
Riverwood began as a mining town on the Snake River, which provided
early residents with a source of water. Your company intensely mined the
hills surrounding Riverwood in the 1930s and 1940s. The important metals
that came from this area included zinc and silver. The by-products of mining
and processing the metal ores were collected in storage ponds built in
accordance with the specifications and regulations of that time. In seasons
with average rainfall, the runoff from the waste ponds contains heavy-metal
ions at levels within the values specified by your company's EPA permit.
Your company monitors effluent values and keeps the ponds secured. Your
company's structural engineers are responsible for upkeep of storage ponds
at abandoned mine sites. However, during heavy rainfall, some underground
settling in the mines and avalanches in hilly areas of the Snake River have
been noted.
At this time, there is no evidence of any toxic organic substances
(such as PCBs or pesticides) in any of your holding ponds or drainage areas.
A recent inventory of substances in the soil and holding ponds amply
documented this fact. You know, however, that even though there is no
direct evidence linking your company to the fish kill, it is always difficult for
you to convince the public that your company is not the source of the harm.
You are considering a new advertising campaign to help convince people that
mining is beneficial to them personally.
Scientists
You are responsible for explaining how the analyzed data supports the
proposed cause of the fish kill. You should be prepared to explain what
the data mean and why data fluctuations are noted from month to month
or year to year. You may be called on to explain concepts such as pH,
solubility of molecular and ionic substances, units of concentration,
water-purification techniques, the hydrologic cycle, and other waterrelated concepts. It is important that you help council members and
other attendees understand how the analyzed data document the cause
of the fish kill.
81904316
-6-
Consulting Engineers
Contaminated runoff from agricultural land is an ongoing concern for
Riverwood. Your consulting firm was hired to do a detailed examination of
the cause of the fish kill. Your task was to determine whether accident,
human error, negligence, or an unforeseen circumstance was responsible for
the Riverwood crisis. In addition, you were responsible for a decision to
make a scheduled heavy release of water from the dam just before the fish
kill occurred. This was a routine release, done to make room in the reservoir
for the impending rains. Finally, you were asked to prepare scenarios or
suggest improvements that would prevent recurring fish kills.
County Sanitation Commission
You are responsible for the protection and safety of the Snake River
water supply. You are the group that completes most of the routine water
testing for the supply of drinking water in Riverwood. It is important to
know what the standards that specify the quality of drinking water mean and
to explain how the water testing is done.
You know that it is very possible that a homeowner could dispose of a
toxic, possibly banned substance in a storm drain or sewer system. For the
past few years, you have dealt with several instances of improper disposal of
household chemicals. To combat this, you have sponsored a marketing
campaign that urges people to dispose of household and garden chemicals
properly. You recently began a summer program so that homeowners can
bring unwanted household and garden chemicals to a special recycling center.
Nonetheless, you know that heavy rain could wash the pesticide through the
sewage system and into the river.
81904316
-7-
HINTS FOR FACTORS RESEARCH IDEAS
Snake River Flow
Why might dam water be released?
Why might this be a problem?
Try a “google” search for “pollution and dam releases”.
Pesticides
What
other
What
Try:
methods do you use to restrict the release of pesticides and
chemicals into the natural water supply?
improvements could be made to prevent recurring fish kills?
Cooperative Farms, Licensing, and Training; Cooperative Farm
Strategies; or Prosperous Cooperative Farms.
Consider household versus agricultural application of pesticides.
Look for how the pesticides are applied and what impact this might
have on the environment.
Look for safety regulations regarding the two groups.
Other Contaminants
What is your chief concern?
Why are heavy rain periods a particular problem?
What are examples of non-point source contamination in “real” communities?
What are solutions to non-point source contamination in “real” situations?
You should be able to report maximum contamination levels (MCLs) for
hazardous water contaminants.
You should also know the allowable limits or expected ranges for other
analyzed water data.
Try: Yahoo or another search engine and search for articles on nonpoint source contamination; the EPA website; and the
Chesapeake Bay Alliance website.
Dissolved Oxygen
What have you found out about the biological oxygen demand /
dissolved oxygen levels?
What affect does this have on fish?
Could this be a contributing factor to the fish kill?
What could be the cause of problems in dissolved oxygen levels?
81904316
-8-
CHECKLIST BOX
TOPIC
PAGE in PACKET
RUBRIC PAGE
DATE DUE
1–7
X
Pre-Library
(check when
done)
Read About Project
7 Day Graph
Factor One
Two Year Graph
Factor One
7 Day Graph
FactorTwo
Two Year Graph
FactorTwo
Graph Analysis
Factor One
Graph Analysis
Factor Two
Oral Presentation
Worksheet
Beginning of Library
Day Two
Beginning of Library
Day Two
Beginning of Library
Day Two
Beginning of Library
Day Two
Beginning of Library
Day Three
Beginning of Library
Day Three
End of Library
Day Four
Presentation
One Week After Last
Library Day
Partner Rubric
Day of Presentations
Final Worksheet
Day After PIAT
presentations
DONE INDIVIDUALLY!
81904316
-9-
THE DATA
(7 day table one)
81904316
- 10 -
(7 day, table two)
(September 1 – 7)
81904316
- 11 -
two years, table one
81904316
- 12 -
two years, table two
81904316
- 13 -
GRAPHING INSTRUCTIONS
Your group needs to construct a total of four graphs. The four graphs (two
over one week, and two over a two-year period) depend upon the group to
which you are assigned. Your teacher will tell you which two factors you will
graph.
Use the instructions provided for graphing on Excel to help you complete
these graphs. To be useful for your presentation, you will need to either:
(a) print out your graphs large enough for everyone to see, (b) print out a
copy for every few people so that everyone can see, or (c) have it accessible
to be pulled up on the screen for everyone to see.
After completing your graphs, you will need to analyze them using the
worksheet provided.
81904316
- 14 -
USING EXCEL 2010
1. Complete a data table in your EXCEL program.
a. Insert headings as follows:
A1 = Day
B1 = Water Flow (with unit)
C1 = Month
D1 = Water Flow (with unit)
b. Stretch columns using the  |  arrow on top of each box.
c. Input data in boxes A2 – A8, etc. as needed.
2. Graphing Day vs. Water Flow
a. Highlight Day and Water Flow data (not titles).
b.
Click the INSERT tab.
c. Click on SCATTER. Choose top right-hand … with line attached.
d. Click on MOVE CHART (far right on tool bar).
Save as New Sheet. Can name chart here.
e. Click on LAYOUT tab (highlighted under chart tools).
Fix chart title. Choose ABOVE chart. Enter title – be descriptive. Hit
enter. Include name here (John H. Smith).
Repeat for horizontal axis and vertical axis labels. (Include units where
appropriate).
f. Click on LEGEND tab.
Hide the legend by choosing NONE.
g. Check Work and Print.
3. Repeat for your other factor. (total = 4 graphs)
Day vs Factor One
Month vs Factor One
81904316
Day vs. Factor Two
Month vs Factor Two
- 15 -
Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit 1 PIAT
Graphs Examination Worksheet
(one sheet completed for each factor)
(a works cited is required)
As you answer questions three through five on this worksheet, you will need to conduct
research to support your ideas. Be sure to cite the source that you are using in each
instance. To receive full credit for this part of the assignment, you will be expected to
support any ideas with at least five researched facts. You may need more space!
1. Factor Being Examined: ____________________
2. Explain any patterns or irregularities that are apparent in the graphs. Does something
go way up, way down, etc.?
7 Day Graph
30 Month Graph
3. What could cause an irregularity to occur? In other words, how does __ get into water?
What might have changed to cause this change?
81904316
- 16 -
4. How might fish be adversely affected by an irregularity in this factor?
In other words, what does __ do to fish health?
5. Do you think the data analyzed in these graphs might help to account for the Snake River
fish kill? Why or why not?
81904316
- 17 -
Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit 1 PIAT
Oral Presentation Worksheet
(one sheet completed for each factor)
What was the factor you graphed?
What could cause this factor to affect water quality? (Who would be to blame?)
How could this be avoided?
81904316
- 18 -
What effects would this factor have on fish / marine health?
Was there any indication that this factor was involved in the fish kill? If so… who is to blame? How
can they fix the problem so this doesn’t happen again?
81904316
- 19 -
Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit 1 PIAT
Final Worksheet
1. Circle the factors that might have contributed to the fish kill.
Water Flow
Cadmium
Orthophosphates
Water Temperature
Mercury
Pesticides
Dissolved Oxygen
Arsenic
pH
Rain Fall
Nitrates
PCBs
Organic Carbon
Lead
2. Explain your rationale for each of the factors that you circled.
81904316
- 20 -
3. Recall how the different factors can work together to create a problem.
Then, determine what you think is the actual cause of the fish kill.
Low Oxygen Level
 Heavy rainfall or large release from dam
 High water temperatures
 Low dissolved oxygen levels
 High nitrate and phosphate levels
 High organic carbon
Molecular Substances
 Heavy rainfall
 Detectable levels of pesticide in water or fish
 Evidence of pesticide spill
Gas bubble trauma
 Large release from dam
 High, supersaturated dissolved oxygen levels
 Lower water temperatures
Heavy metal poisoning
 Heavy rainfall or large release from dam
 High levels of mercury or heavy metals in water
 Water having a low pH
81904316
- 21 -
4. Who is responsible for the fish kill?
5. How can the fish kill be avoided in the future?
81904316
- 22 -
Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit One Water PIAT
Graphs Rubric
Completeness
Titles
Y Axis
X Axis
Excel
Directions
Overall
Quality
81904316
4
All four
graphs are
complete.
All four
graphs have
appropriate
titles.
All four
graphs have
a correctly
labeled and
constructed
y axis.
All four
graphs have
a correctly
labeled and
constructed
x axis.
All excel
directions
(i.e. color,
etc.) have
been
correctly
followed.
Overall, I
would give
these graphs
an “A” grade.
3
X
X
X
X
2
At least two
graphs are
complete.
At least two
graphs have
appropriate
titles.
At least two
graphs have
a correctly
labeled and
constructed
y axis.
At least two
graphs have
a correctly
labeled and
constructed
x axis.
1
X
X
X
X
0
Less than
two graphs
are complete.
Less than
two graphs
have
appropriate
titles.
Less than
two graphs
have a
correctly
labeled and
constructed
y axis.
Less than
two graphs
have a
correctly
labeled and
constructed
x axis.
Most excel
directions
have been
correctly
followed.
Some excel
directions
have been
correctly
followed.
Few excel
directions
have been
correctly
followed.
Excel
directions
were not
correctly
followed.
Overall, I
would give
these graphs
a “B” grade.
Overall, I
would give
these graphs
a “C” grade.
Overall, I
would give
these graphs
a “D” grade.
Overall, I
would give
these graphs
an “F” grade.
- 23 -
Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit One Water PIAT
Graphs Examination Worksheet Rubric
4
Completeness
Patterns
Identified
Irregularity
Examined
Effect on Fish
Is this a
factor in the
fish kill?
Resources
Used
Works Cited
81904316
Both factors
are completely
addressed.
Any strange
patterns or
irregularities
are thoroughly
described
The possible
causes of an
irregularity is
thoroughly
addressed.
The possible
effects on
fish are
thoroughly
addressed.
The
connection
between this
factor and the
fish kill is
correctly
determined.
Uses at least
five
statements
(cited) to
support ideas.
Correctly
Cites the
sources used.
3
One factor is
completely
addressed, the
second is
somewhat
addressed.
Any strange
patterns or
irregularities
are somewhat
described
The possible
causes of an
irregularity is
somewhat
addressed.
The possible
effects on
fish are
somewhat
addressed.
2
Both factors
are somewhat
addressed.
Any strange
patterns or
irregularities
are minimally
described
X
X
1
The analysis is
clearly lacking
for both
factors.
X
The possible
causes of an
irregularity is
barely
addressed.
The possible
effects on fish
are barely
addressed.
X
X
X
Uses at least
four
statements
(cited)to
support ideas.
Uses at least
three
statements
(cited) to
support ideas.
Uses at least
two statements
(cited) to
support ideas.
Citations
present, but
incorrectly
formatted.
X
X
0
One or more
factors is not
addressed at
all.
Any strange
patterns or
irregularities
are not
addressed.
The possible
causes of an
irregularity is
not
addressed.
The possible
effects on
fish are not
addressed.
The
connection
between this
factor and
the fish kill is
incorrectly
determined.
Uses less
than two
statements
(cited) to
support ideas.
Does not
contain a
works cited.
- 24 -
Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit One Water PIAT
Oral Presentation Worksheet Rubric
Factors
4
Both factors
studied are
identified.
3
X
The possible
causes of an
irregularity
are
thoroughly
explained.
The possible
causes of an
irregularity
are
somewhat
explained.
What effects
would
irregularities in
__ have on fish?
The possible
ways to avoid
an
irregularity
are
thoroughly
explained.
The possible
effects on
fish are
thoroughly
explained.
The possible
ways to avoid
an
irregularity
are
somewhat
explained.
The possible
effects on
fish are
somewhat
explained.
Did this factor
have a bearing on
the Snake River
Fishkill?
The
connection to
Snake River
is thoroughly
made.
The
connection to
snake river is
somewhat
made.
How does __ get
into the water?
How can we avoid
__ getting into
the water?
81904316
2
One Factor
studied is
identified.
X
X
X
X
1
X
The
possible
causes of
an
irregularity
are barely
explained.
The
possible
ways to
avoid an
irregularity
are barely
explained.
The
possible
effects on
fish are
barely
explained.
The
connection
to Snake
River is
barely
made.
0
Neither
factor
studied is
identified.
The
possible
causes of
an
irregularity
are not
explained.
The
possible
ways to
avoid an
irregularity
are not
explained.
The
possible
effects on
fish are
not
explained.
The
connection
to Snake
River is
missing.
- 25 -
Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit One Water PIAT
4
Introduction
Thoroughly captures the
interest of the audience.
Oral Presentation Rubric
3
2
Somewhat captures
the interest of the
audience.
Barely captures the
interest of the
audience.
One Factor studied
is identified.
Both factors studied are
identified.
X
How does __
get into the
water?
The possible causes of an
irregularity are
thoroughly explained.
The possible causes
of an irregularity are
somewhat explained.
How can we
avoid getting
__ into the
water?
What effects
could __ have
on fish?
Did this
factor cause
the Snake
River Fishkill?
The possible ways to
avoid an irregularity are
thoroughly explained.
The possible ways to
avoid an irregularity
are somewhat
explained.
The possible effects on
fish are thoroughly
explained.
The possible effects
on fish are
somewhat explained.
The connection to Snake
River is thoroughly made.
The connection to
snake river is
somewhat made.
X
Sophisticated
Arrangement of Content
Visual aids greatly
supported the group’s
arguments.
Functional
Arrangement of
Content
Visual aids support
the group’s
arguments.
Confused
Arrangement of
Content
Visual aids barely
support the group’s
arguments.
Presentation
The students truly took
on the persona of their
group.
The students took
on the persona of
their group.
The students barely
took on the persona
of their group.
Language
Word choices are
descriptive, vivid and
grammatically correct.
Word choices
grammatically
correct and
somewhat vivid.
Gestures, posture,
eye contact, etc.
somewhat enhance
the presentation.
Members usually
speak clearly and
audibly.
All members present
some information.
Word choices are
rote and have some
grammatical errors.
Factors
Organization
Visual Aids
Body
Language
Gestures, posture, eye
contact, etc. greatly
enhance the presentation.
Audibility
Involvement
81904316
Members always speak
clearly and audibly.
All members are equally
involved.
X
X
X
Gestures, posture,
eye contact, etc. do
not enhance the
presentation.
Members sometimes
speak clearly and
audibly.
All members are
involved.
1
Does not capture
the audience’
interest.
X
The possible causes
of an irregularity
are barely
explained.
The possible ways
to avoid an
irregularity are
barely explained.
0
Has no
introduction.
Neither factor
studied is
identified.
The possible causes
of an irregularity
are not explained.
The possible ways
to avoid an
irregularity are not
explained.
The possible
effects on fish are
barely explained.
The possible
effects on fish are
not explained.
The connection to
Snake River is
barely made.
The connection to
Snake River is
missing.
X
Content is not
organized.
Visual aids do not
support the group’s
arguments.
X
No visual aid was
used.
The students didn’t
take on the persona
of their group.
Word choices are
poor and have many
grammatical errors.
X
Gestures, posture,
eye contact, etc.
detract from the
presentation.
Members do not
speak clearly and
audibly.
Not all members
are involved.
X
- 26 -
Arnoldi / Lazaar
Chem Com
Unit One PIAT
Rubric for Partner Evaluation
Partner Work
Ethic
Partner/Project
Enjoyment
Partner Choice
in Future
Projects
Fairness of
Work
Distribution
Overall Partner
Evaluation
81904316
4
My partner
contributed as
much as I did to
this project.
I really enjoyed
working with my
partner on this
project.
I would
definitely work
with this person
on another
project.
I believe that
my partner
shared
responsibilities
for this project
fairly.
Overall, I would
give my partner
an "A" grade for
this project.
3
My partner
contributed
almost as much
as I did to this
project.
I somewhat
enjoyed working
with my partner
on this project.
I would probably
work with this
person on
another project.
2
My partner
contributed
much less than I
did to this
project.
I did not enjoy
working with my
partner on this
project.
I would probably
not work with
this person on
another project.
I believe that
my partner
tried to fairly
share
responsibilities.
I believe that
my partner
barely tried to
fairly share
responsibilities.
Overall, I would
give my partner
an "B" grade for
this project.
Overall, I would
give my partner
an "C" grade for
this project.
1
My partner did
not contribute
at all to this
project.
I really did not
enjoy working
with my partner
on this project.
I would
definitely not
work with this
person on
another project.
I believe that
my partner did
not try to fairly
share
responsibilities.
Overall, I would
give my partner
an "D" or "F"
grade for this
project.
- 27 -
Final Gradesheet / Checklist
Category
Due Date
Points
Factor One Graphs Completed
Factor Two Graph Completed
Day Two
Day Two
_____ / 2
_____ / 2
Factor One Graph Analysis Completed
Factor Two Graph Analysis Completed
Day Three
Day Three
_____ / 4
_____ / 4
Oral Presentation Worksheet Completed
Day Four
_____ / 4
Pre-Work
Total Score
Project
= _____ (16)
Graphs (raw)
Day Two
_____ / 24
Graphs Analysis Worksheets (raw)
Day Three
_____ / 28
Oral Presentation Worksheet(raw)
Day Four
_____ / 20
Presentation
Last Day
_____ / 52
Total RAW Score
= _____ (124)
Total Project Score
(converted)
= _____ (100)
Post-Work
Final Worksheet
Two Days after Presentations
_____ / 10
Partner Score
(rubric / 2)
Two Days after Presentations
_____ / 9
Total Score = _____ (19)
FINAL SCORE = _____ / 135
81904316
- 28 -